time soon. thanks to our panelist. it's an issue we are committed to following here on cnn. join me every morning on "american morning" 6:00 a.m. eastern. catch ali velshi and me. every saturday at 1:00 and sunday at 3:00. thanks for watching us this afternoon. have a great weekend. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com one fractured nation puts its trust in the ballot box while another threatening to vote itself apart. how is president obama's outreach to the muslim world working? hello, everyone, i'm christiane amanpour and welcome to our program. today, we are taking the pulse of president obama's efforts to improve relations with the islamic world.

and to secure the peace in some of the most troubled places. we'll examine the future of iraq one month after elections that have yet to produce a clear winner. we asked former prime minister alawi who leads by just two votes about democracy about new violence and about the withdrawal of u.s. troops. and then we turn to another place where the u.s. is also heavily invested, and that's sudan. will next week's election there unravel a peace deal that was brokered by the bush administration? we'll speak with a representative of the southern sudan government and a former bush administration official concerned that sudanese president omar al bashir, for all the talk of elections, could lead the country back to war. >> what i fear though is that bashir is not honorable, he goes back on his word and so the low-intensity conflict that we see today will in fact, escalate to a full-blown war that we saw

the 22-year civil war that killed more than 2 million people. >> but first, the obama administration's new tone in conversations with the muslim world is showing some dividends since his big speech in cairo last june. >> more recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many muslims. in a cold war in which muslim majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. >> and, of course, the u.s. struggle against terrorism. it wasn't just muslim countries caught up in that, it was muslim individuals as well, such as the swiss-born islamic scholar tariq ramadan. the bush administration had accused him of helping the palestinian group hamas through charitable donations, and though he denied it he was refused

entry into the united states in 2004 as he was preparing to take up a position as professor at notre dame university in the american midwest. but last year, he won an appeal. and this week, i spoke with tariq ramadan on his first visit here since the ban was lifted. so thank you for being here. >> thank you for your invitation. >> so you must be really relieved to be back in the united states, right? >> yes, i'm happy. and it's, for me, you know, the whole process is clearing my name from all this wrong allegations and accusations and now it's quite clear that you know, my record is clear and there is nothing wrong in what i have been doing. >> do you think you were caught up in the heat of that moment back in fwou -- 2004, or do you think some of those sensitivities remain? >> i think that it's deeper than that because just after september 11th, i came here and i was invited and i spoke. i was even invited to the state department to give a lecture there. so, it was really about my

criticism towards the american policy in afghanistan and iraq and what i called the unilateral support towards the israeli government, not respecting the palestinian rights. so, it was at that moment, under the bush administration. >> why are you back and taking such a public profile, high profile? >> look, because, in fact, this story with the previous administration is over. now, it's really for me to come to the essential and the essential is to say, for example, as a european and as a westerner that islam is a western religion and that muslims are now american-muslims, european muslims, and we have to live together. we have a common future. it's quite important to reach out. the time for more explanation, more dialogue and what president obama said in cairo was this. it was not only a speech directed towards the muslims and the muslim countries. it was also to the american's understanding that now we are

living together. >> so president obama, as we mentioned, as the world knows, has sort of charted a different course toward the muslim world. that speech in cairo was quite revolutionary. has the promise of that speech been fulfilled, even in part over the last year? >> i think that we have to be constructively critical. many things are the same and remain the same. what he came with is a new vision and new discourse, a new way to talk to the muslims and talk about our diversity and living together. and this has to be acknowledged. what he said, for example, about us living together and the values, this cairo speech was very deep and very well thought. >> are you going to say anything different about this administration than you did the last one? >> no. it's quite clear that it's changing and we have to acknowledge the shift. i don't want to criticize for the sake of criticizing. it's really constructive criticism. so yes, we are waiting for this administration to deliver and more practical things. so, we heard the words, now we

need, you know, practical things to be done. and then, for example, when you have tensions with the israeli government today, still the palestinians are suffering in huzzah and the west bank, we need things to be changed and we need also this discourse on islam to be translated into something which is a real policy for the future. so i -- i would say exactly the same as to what we are expecting, but they are positive trends that we have to take into account. >> you, yourself, mr. ramadan are a very controversial figure. you describe yourself as a muslim reformer, as an islamic reformer, and yet, there are many people who say that you speak with a forked tongue. and i'm going to show you the cartoon, and it's one of many, many cartoons that have been put out about you. basically, people are saying because of some of the positions that you take or do not take, that you present yourself as one thing but that you are an islamist in sheep's clothing, as

some people have said. you are a closet fundamentalist. or as the french academic caroline forest says, i don't see anyone today as effective as tariq ramadan in furthering fundamentalism in france, for instance. you are very controversial because you do not take absolute positions against certain things that people in democracies, people in the west, believe should be condemned out of hand. >> i think that this is -- >> such as stoning of women >> this is completely wrong, because you have to come to what i'm saying and not the way it's described. >> can i show you then what you were saying? >> yes, of course. you can do that. >> in a french debate with then interior minister nicolas sarkozy back in 2003. now, these are the pictures. what basically you were saying was we should have a moratorium on stoning of women while we can get a consensus among islamic scholars and mr. sarkozy was furious. he said, what do you mean a moratorium, don't you condemn it

out of hand? what are you saying? we just stop it a little bit, discuss it and continue it? so tell us, should you not condemn out of hand stoning of women for whatever reason? >> no. this is not the point and the way you are translating what i was saying is wrong. what i was saying is that myself in my position is this. i'm against implementing not only stoning, the hudud, what we call in arabic the hudud, the penal code, stoning, death penalty and corporal punishment. my position is this is not implementable but we are dealing with muslims. and we are dealing with governments and they believe in the koran and they believe in the scriptural sources and we have text on this.

to condemn stoning in paris is not going to change anything on the ground. why for example, france or the united states of america are dealing with these petty monarch and dealing with governments implementing them. my position is quite clear. i'm against implementing them and what i'm asking the scholars, three things what do the texts say what are the conditions and in which context? in the same name of islam, we have to stop and to come to a moratorium on this and to have a discussion exactly like amnesty international when it comes to death penalty it is saying let us first go for a moratorium to stop it right now and then to have a discussion. >> coming up, we will have more of that interview with tariq ramadan, as well as with james zogby who is the president of the arab-american institute on the differences between islam in america and in europe. that's next.

we are building a website by ourselves. announcer: there's an easier way. create your own business site with intuit websites. just choose a style, then customize, publish and get found. sweet. get a 30-day free trial at intuit.com.

the burqa is not a religious symbol. it's a sign of enslavement, of debasement. i want to say this solemnly. the burqa will not be welcome on the territory of the french republic.

we cannot accept in our country women imprisoned behind a net, deprived of all social life, deprived of their identity. this is not how the french republic perceives the dignity of women. >> that was french president nicolas sarkozy speaking about one of the most contentious issues in france, indeed, across europe. rejoining our conversation with with the islamic scholar, tariq ramadan, and also james zogby, founder and president of the arab-american institute, i began by asking ramadan whether he agreed with the french president. >> no, i don't agree with this. i didn't agree with the french policy banning the head scarf in schools. i said it's wrong. and new laws for banning the covering the face or the burqa in the streets is not going to happen. first, we have got the european union saying this is not legal this is not constitutional.

so, my position is that the starting point is to have a position of principle. it is against islam to impose women to wear the head scarf or burqa, against human rights to impose to women to take it off. this should be the principle of freedom. >> james zogby, this particular issue of clothes, symbols, religious or cultural that doesn't play such a role here for muslims in the united states, does it? >> no. and europe's problem is bigger than clothing. it's a question of self-definition. there is no ethnicity that defines being american. the absorptive quality of the identity of american is such that irish, polish, yes, arabs and pakistans within a few years become american and america becomes changed with them. that doesn't happen in europe. you can be a third generation kurd in germany and always be a turk or an algerian in france and always be an arab or paki in london. that is the problem europe faces

is that it has a difficulty expanding the definition of nationality to include a multicultural society. and that fundamental, i guess, bigotry or narrowness of identity is the real problem france is facing. and they can't force this, as tariq is saying, they can't force people to adopt a french way, whatever that means, and not change france to reflect the diverse population that its country is becoming. >> do you think, tariq, in general that europe will be able to figure this out, as james said it is not just muslims but immigrants in general? >> yes, i agree with that, that there is a problem of migration and immigrants in europe. but i would say we have to be very cautious not to judge europe as if it was, you know, the same situation everywhere. we have now the second, third and onward generation, four generations in france, in the

uk. and far from the national controversies about visibility. at the end of the day, switzerland, my country, we have the minarets, the head scarfs in france, the mosques in germany, all the visible symbols are problematic, because it is as if this is a new presence creating problems. still, if you go now and assess what is happening in the societies and the gallup, for example, survey is showing that the european muslims are feeling europeans, they are feeling germans. so we have to be cautious not to look at it in the negative way because i really think that deep down there is a movement of integration, contribution and it will work, but we need time. and next, so what does it mean to be a muslim in america nearly a decade after 9/11? more of our conversation in a moment.

we return now to our conversation with islamic

scholar, tariq ramadan and james zogby who is the founder and president of the arab-american institute. tariq ramadan comes from one of the most famous families in the islamic world. his grandfather was hassan al banna, the founder of the muslim brotherhood in egypt. i asked ramadan whether his family history might confuse people, hearing his call about islam and reform. let me further ask you about your personal background, because you are the grandson of hassa al banna, the founder of the muslim brotherhood, which did usher in a period of extremism, of belief in a very strict version of sharia and islamic law. you've also not fully condemned a certain cleric in 2003 who talked about the rationalization for women who are suicide bombers. and there are people -- >> that's -- please.

please. please, no. >> there are people here who are very confused about how to judge what you believe and what you're talking about and what you're trying to preach about in islam and reform. >> if you want to -- you read what he is writing and look at what he's doing. you don't come with oh, your grandfather and what was said. first, what was said about my grandfather in the specific period of time in the '30s and '40s is not what is said now. and we have to be very cautious to look at, for example, the muslim brotherhood is something that has to be historically contextualized. this is one. secondly, i do not live in egypt, i live and was born and raised in europe and i am producing thought from my time. i want to be judged on this. so anyone who is telling you i was not clear in suicide bombings, for example, targeting innocent, he is wrong or she's wrong. this never happened. my position on this is the palestinian resistance or iraqi resistance is legitimate, the means should be ethical. you cannot target innocent people. you cannot target civilians. i was always clear. if so much mistrust is shedding

on what i'm saying, what does it means? is it revealing something about me or about the state of affairs within the society which is spreading around suspicion? >> you are nodding, james zogby. is it revealing about tariq ramadan or about the state of the society we live in? >> listen, after president obama spoke in cairo, i remember i was actually on your network and then i did another and the reactions that his speech received from american conservatives was shocking. i said at the end in answer to a question, will president obama make change in people's attitudes? i said, among muslims. yes, but i'm not so sure he is going to win over american conservatives. there is a problem and tariq is absolutely right. and the problem is here and i think president obama has correctly identified his mission as president both ways. it's to create american understanding of the muslim world as well as muslim understanding of america. we got a problem here.

what is said about him is said about me. i'm a maranite catholic who after i spoke at the department of justice's 40th anniversary of the civil rights -- signing of the civil rights bill, bloggers writing for fairly respectable sites said, jihadist or hezbollah supporter or wahabi supporter, holder's buddy is a wahabist. how nonsensical is that? and yet that is the poison that spreads and really begins to define myself and tariq and others in very unfair ways. >> okay, but do you think those are in the more -- some might say the creepy, loony corners of the blogesphere or do you think this is something that is a real obstacle towards understanding in the majority of the country? >> not in the majority, but in a significant enough group of elites who begin to define and put it in print and then make some people in politics hesitant

to be able to speak out. listen, when you had barack obama's opponents mainstream democrats and the republican nominee questioning his being a real american, not just his birth, but yes, ma'am, no he is not an arab, he's a decent human being, that stuff sticks and it means we have leadership that has failed to address these issues. >> okay, so you're here, tariq ramadan to try to fix this. can you do anything, you think that will make a difference in these speeches that you are going to deliver, in these public appearances? >> at least i'm trying to do something, which is to speak about the new we. the new we is you and me in the theme of our common values and principles, to come together and to nurture iran a sense of belonging. because at the end of the day what is very important for american muslims to feel at home and contribute in a critical way, constructive way, exactly for europeans. and we all have to understand as citizens that this is a very,

very imperative responsibility if we want to be able to talk to muslim majority countries and to muslims around the world. so the speech of obama talking to americans is very important but us together, at our level we should be much more committed to change these mentalities of victimhood. >> this is a discussion that is going to go on for a long time, clearly. tariq ramadan, james zogby, thank you both so much for joining me. >> thank you. and to join another discussion about a claim that victimization of muslims in america is a complete myth, logon to amanpour.com/facebook. next, it was hoped that peace and democracy in iraq would spread around the middle east. what about the u.s. mission in iran now? how will to be affected by the uncertain steps there toward democracy? [ advisor 1 ] i have clients say it's really hard to save for the future and they've come to a point where it's overwhelming. [ advisor 2 ] oh gee, i'm scared to tell you

i've got this amount of credit card debt or i've got a 15-year-old and we never got around to saving for their college. that's when i go to work. we talk, we start planning. we can fix this. i know we can do it. when clients walk out of my office they feel confident about their retirement. [ male announcer ] visit ameriprise.com and put a confident retirement more within reach. most people try to get rid of algae, and we're trying to grow it. the algae are very beautiful. they come in blue or red, golden, green. algae could be converted into biofuels... that we could someday run our cars on. in using algae to form biofuels, we're not competing with the food supply. and they absorb co2, so they help solve the greenhouse problem, as well. we're making a big commitment to finding out... just how much algae can help to meet... the fuel demands of the world. youtube didn't exist. and facebook was still run out of a dorm room. when we built our first hybrid,

more people had landlines than cell phones, and gas was $1.75 a gallon. and now, while other luxury carmakers are building their first hybrids, lexus hybrids have traveled 5.5 billion miles. and that's quite a head start. ♪ ( tires screeching ) there's never been a better time...

( tires squealing ) to have bad tires. come to meinekand save $20 on two or more tires.

at meineke, you're always the driver. welcome back to our program. and we now turn to iraq, where successful, yet inconclusive elections, have been followed by worsening violence. this week, insurgents blasted baghdad, leaving dozens dead and more than 100 wounded. it was the latest in a series of recent attacks that have killed more than 100 people. and with no clear winner, the elections have led to political gridlock. at last count, prime minister nuri al malaki was two seats behind his main rival, the former prime minister, allawi, who is now struggling to form a coalition government. when i spoke to him this week, he told me that it would take about two months to form a new government, but some would consider that rather optimistic.

and with the resurgence in violence, i also asked him if president obama's plan to reduce u.s. forces to 50,000 by this summer was also too optimistic. >> i think it's possible. i think it should be done. however, the security does not depend on the number of troops available here. the security depends on getting out in the way of sectarianism, or embarking on a course, a real course of reconciliation and reconstructing the institutions, security institutions, to get them based on a professional basis and to get them intact, loyal to the country as a whole, not loyal to a sect. and this is the way to improve and get the security improved in this country. >> but former u.s. ambassador to iraq, ryan crocker, remains spectacle. he was there in iraq during the

u.s. surge. he tells me that u.s. troops will have to remain in the country for a long time. >> they have moved a great distance, without question, but the distance in front of them is greater still. the challenges are almost infinite. you've touched on a few. there are more kurd/arab relations and so forth. it's going to be a very, very long road. but the violence, while worrisome, is not a primary issue. it's a question of whether the violence affects the politics of government formation. that's what we have to really keep an eye on in this immediate phase. and once the government is formed, a whole new set of challenges are going to be in front of us. we may think we're done with iraq, that it's been seven long years and it's time to switch channels, but, you know, it's just the beginning of the story. >> i continued my conversation with ambassador crocker and we were also joined by brett mcgurk, another former bush

administration official who had helped negotiate the agreement between the u.s. and iraq for the eventual withdrawal of u.s. troops. i asked him what the surge in violence now means for the long-term stability of iraq. >> we are in, right now, a period of highest risk, the 90 days after the election are always identified as a period of highest risk. there are two timelines the white house is under. one is the security agreement, all u.s. forces out by 2011, that is a binding international agreement negotiated with the iraqis. the second is a unilateral obligation which president obama said a month after coming to office, at the end of august, we'll be down to 50,000 troops. >> is that right? >> you have to be testing assumptions. we have no idea what is happening day to day and the assumptions underlining that withdrawal are called into question. >> would you agree with that, ambassador crocker, given the level of violence now? fot just since the election, it

was before the election as well. >> the violence is a concern but also predictable. the iraqis are tough people. i think they will withstand this. it's not the violence that concerns me so much as simply the tough politics of government formation. i think mr. allawi was optimistic when he said a government could be formed in two months. i think the more realistic deadline is the beginning of ramadan at the -- at the start of august. >> but that -- >> so i worry about a decision to have us down to 50,000 troops, perhaps in the same month that a new government is formed. >> and that's an extraordinarily long time, four months, five months until that day that you just mentioned. can iraq actually afford that amount of time in a political vacuum? >> well, first it is not really a political vacuum. the maliki cabinet is fully empowered. the command and control of the civilian leadership over the

military is there, and we've seen that in their responses to this violence. so, i would not characterize it as a vacuum. obviously we would like to see this move quickly, but it is going to be extraordinarily complicated. everybody will be talking to everybody else. and while allawi may have 91 votes, he is still 72 votes short of the necessary majority to form a government. so this will not be easy and it will not be quick. >> you were there all through the time when muqtada al sadr was not exactly pro-american, still isn't. does it surprise you, unsettle you, that, in fact this group could become the kingmaker? >> i think it's just part of the political progression in iraq. i don't find it terribly unsettling. the sadrists have always had an appeal to the dispossessed urban shiia populations. and they've finally found a way

to get their act together sufficiently to garner a respectable number of seats. their militia days seem to be behind them. they seem to have recognized if they're going to have any appeal going forward, it has to be as a political movement, part of a political iraq. >> let's talk a little bit about that. muqtada al sadr has been in iran for the last couple of years. what concerns you about iran's role? >> well, iran is going to be influential, but they're not going to be decisive. i don't agree with those that say they are decisive. again, they invited a lot of parties to tehran for talks that is going to happen. allawi is going to go the saudis are going to be there, we're going to be there. but it's interesting, the sadrist appeal is this sunni, arab, nationalist, iraqi appeal. strong roots in iraq, going back hundreds of years. and muqtada al sadr going in iran has tainted that appeal a little bit. sadrists in iran is not a threat. we haven't seen a sign post of

real deterioration. we haven't seen militias take the streets to protect neighborhoods. we have not seen the ministry stand down. things we started to see in 2006, we haven't seen that yet. that's so far positive. we just got to watch it every day. >> i'm hearing you both talk about everything that's so positive. i'm trying to sort of connect the reality with your rhetoric. i know things got better after the surge in 2007 but we have all been stunned at the level of violence that has come up before the election and since the election and just the string of suicide bombings. i mean, appearing to act with the same kind of impunity that they did before the surge. how is it that you are still so positive about this? i'm going to ask you, ambassador crocker. you seem to be playing down this violence which is taking so many lives right now. >> we have seen unfortunately all too many episodes of this in the past. we saw it during my time in iraq. we've seen it subsequently as al qaeda has shifted from attacks

on civilian populations to attacks on iraqi government ministries. now they seem to be shifting back to attacks on the civilian population. they are horrific. clearly it has to be an imperative for the iraqis and ourselves to crack these networks and bring the violence down. but what we have seen repeatedly is that the attacks, as bloody and as vicious as they are, have not stopped the political process in iraq. >> all right. >> we don't expect them to stop it now. >> we have about 20 seconds, haven't stopped it but they are certainly hampering it. how does this change? >> again, this is why i say we are in a period of very high risk. we have to look at the draw down schedule, make sure the iraqi government is acting in a caretaker capacity. people need to know the state is protecting them. in 2006 the state was not protecting them. they turned to militias. right now the state is doing a decent job. we have to make sure they keep on doing it. it's going to be very delicate and challenging.

>> brett mcgurk, ambassador crocker, thank you so much for being here with us. and coming up, elections and the potential for war in another part of the world the u.s. is so heavily invested in. wow, is this... fiber one honey clusters? yes.

but it can't have... can't have about half a i assure you it does. i can only taste... only taste the crunchy clusters, honey, and brown sugar. no madam, i don't have esp. (announcer) fiber one. cardboard no. delicious yes. some people like to pretend... a flood could never happen to them... and that their homeowners insurance... protects them. it doesn't. stop pretending. it can happen to you.

protect your home with flood insurance. call the number on your screen... for your free brochure.

hello, everyone. i'm don lemon live at the cnn world headquarters in atlanta. top stories on cnn. the casket carrying the body of polish president lech kaczynski is now in warsaw at the presidential palace. poles are mourning the death of kaczynski. his wife and dozens of political

and mel temilitary leaders. leaders are arriving in washington. president barack obama started one on one talks. he began meeting with india's prime minister about 45 minutes ago. he has meetings scheduled today with leaders from kazakhstan, south africa, pakistan and niger nigeria. a total of 47 countries will participate in the conference. mr. obama hopes it will strengthen efforts to keep weapons away from terrorists. earlier today, 39 years of history gone in less than a minute. check this out. >> dallas cowboy fans said good-bye to their football team's old stomping grounds. irving texas stadium went down in a controlled explosion. of course, the stadium was the nfl team's home for nearly 38 years. i'll talk more about these stories coming up at the top of the hour. more "amanpour" just minutes away. i think i'll go with the preferred package.

good choice. only meineke lets you choose the brake service that's right for you. and save 50% on pads and shoes. meineke. when we talk about sudan, it is usually about darfur, where the sudanese government mounted what's being called a genocidal campaign. but sudan's elections next week bring into focus an even longer and bloodier conflict, the sudden sudan fight to win independence from the north. cnn's david mckenzie takes us there. >> reporter: this is not how sudan's historic free election was supposed to happen. the sudan people's liberation movement has pulled out of the northern and darfur vote just days before the ballot. it has withdrawn its presidential candidate, a muslim. he was the only serious contender against omar al bashir, president of sudan, the world's only sitting president

indicted on war crimes. international monitoring groups say his party has engaged in widespread vote rigging, claims his party denies. the international community has worked hard to make a fair election possible. but analysts say if that fails, the reality could be far worse. >> if they do not go according to plan and if peaceful resolution isn't found, then i think it's very possible that we see a return to conflict in sudan. >> reporter: war raged for two decades in sudan, pitting christian and animus rebels in the south against the muslim north, leaving more than 2 million dead and a fractured nation. after protracted negotiations, war ended in 2005 with a peace agreement that called for elections and a referendum in the south on whether to split from the north. at stake, sudan's massive oil reserves, found mostly in the south but still controlled by khartoum. it's a potential boon for the poor nation.

and for western companies if a fair election allows for lifting of sanctions. but the north/south divide is not the only conflict in the way. a separate deadly conflict in the darfur region where government backed militia wage in a brutal campaign against african tribes has killed hundreds of thousands. the u.s. government and international criminal court pointed the finger at omar al bashir. the people in southern sudan are already looking past this election to the referendum on independence, which they hope will end decades of conflict and make them africa's newest nation. dave mckenzie, cnn, nairobi. >> now, despite all the allegations of vote-rigging and, of course, of boycotting, the u.s. representative there says that he is nonetheless confident of a free and fair election so what will happen, what about the fears of new violence in sudan? i spoke with the former u.s.

assistant secretary of state for afteraffairs african affairs who suffered under president george w. bush and with a senior member of the sudan people's liberation movement. let me first turn to you. you boycotting the elections, why are you boycotting and aren't you afraid that the violence is going to result? >> first of all, thank you for having me on the show, christiane. the agreement that we have signed in 2005 was meant to address two issues. one of them is secular transform of sudan. because sudan has a mystery of marginalization, of marginalized areas, so having this election is very important. and also referendum in 2011, january 9th. so based on the process that we have gone through in the

electoral process, it is very clear that the conditions are not conducive for us to participate in the election in the north. but in the south, we are still having elections. >> so what that, you know very well in darfur we cannot have election in darfur because of the ongoing genocide that is happening in darfur. and also in the north, it is very clear that the national congress party, the party of omar el bashir is fully in control of the ballots pripted in the central bank of sudan. >> that's certainly what your party has said. let me turn to ambassador frazier. i was under the understanding that the 2005 comprehensive bush agreement was signed. i was so hopeful for that. and the united states helection stake for the united states and the foreign policy. is this just going to be a

failure? >> the election is a central piece of the ongoing peace. the problem with the election is it's coming so close to when the referendum will be held in january 2011. in the comprehensive peace agreement, it was presumed that it would come almost midway in this interim period of six years. so it should have happened a good year, two years ago. but i think that, as happens in sudan, often they will muddle through. i think it's extremely unfortunate that the sudan people's liberation movement is withdrawing. i was very confident that their candidate,i candidate, yasir armand would be able to give the people a choice so they wouldn't be left with an indicted war criminal like el bashir. so in my position, it's upsetting the opposition is dropping out and leaving the

people hanging. >> that's a tough indictment of what you're doing just now. you're leaving the people of sudan hanging. >> if you look at it, christiane, we are withdrawing because bashir, as you know very well, is an indicted man. he won't legitimatize himself. by all means, he cannot lose this election. he can do anything to rig this election. and all the arrangement that has been made already, it's very clear that he has rigged the election, and he wants to win by all means to legitimatize himself. >> there seems to be two competing momentums here 689 on the one hand, president bashir wants legitimacy from this election. on the other hand, you seem to be saying, well, this election doesn't matter. what we really want is the referendum and to secede. i see you nodding, ambassador fraser. >> that's right. i think that's absolutely the case. they're basically throwing in the towel in terms of the notion of even contesting in the north. they're essentially saying we will go, and we will have a separate country.

so what we really need to concentrate on is the january 2011 referendum. and i certainly understand that sentiment. what i fear, though, is that bashir is not honorable. he goes back on his word. the national congress party operates tactically, and that come january 2011, we are going to find that they are, in fact, not going to allow that referendum to go forward. so the low intensity conflict that we see today will, in fact, escalate to a full blown war that we saw, the 22-year civil war that killed more than 2 million people, which would be a very dark future for the sudanese people. >> so what plans do you have? what agenda do you have, mr. gatkuoth, from avoiding a full scale civil war from breaking out again? >> it's very important the referendum is conducted on time in january of 2011. >> but it might be. >> and for bashir to go forward with the issue of oil, the issue of pipeline. these are things we need to discuss with the north. we are cooperating with the north to have a peaceful divorce

because it's very clear the issue of sudan is not accommodative to marginalized people. >> you're obviously a bush administration official. what do you see as the success or failure of the obama administration policy, the increasing offer of carrots as well as sticks to the bashir government? has it produced anything? >> well, no. i think the biggest challenge for the obama administration is they're divided. and you see very mixed signals coming out from the special envoy versus the secretary to get them on one page, the president himself has to exercise leadership. the president has to come out and say what he thinks should happen in sudan. he needs to pick up the phone and talk to african leaders so that he can get them on board with the position that the united states is looking for. and he needs to also exercise his diplomacy in places like china because probably the united states, china, and the african union will be the critical, critical players in

the future of sudan besides the sudanese people and government itself. >> last word to you, mr. gatkuoth. you just heard ambassador frazer question the leadership credentials of the opposition, leaving the sudanese people hang out to dry because you don't want to contest those elections. what do you see now for the next foreseeable future between the election and the referendum? >> let me just add one thing before i answer that. it is very important that -- for us to avoid the war. this agreement, the cpa, was an agreement witnessed by the international community, more than 17 countries, the u.n. and everybody was witnessing this. so it is very important for us to have soft landing in 2011 by having the international community engaged in this to make sure that we have peaceful divorce. the last one is about opposition. i think it is very important for the opposition to come together and unite themselves to see a united front. but to be honest with you, in

2011 the world should be ready to have two countries. sudan is going to disintegrate. >> sudan is going to disintegrate. that's your final word? >> yes, i am sure. >> ezekiel gatkuoth, ambassador frazer from washington, thank you so much for joining us. next in our postscript, we remember a key event in the breaking up of another country, poland, at the beginning of world war ii. [ advisor 1 ] what do you see yourself doing one week,

one month, five years after you do retire? ♪ client comes in and they have a box. and inside that box is their financial life. people wake up and realize i better start doing something. we open up that box. we organize it. and we make decisions. we really are here to help you.

they look back and think, "wow. i never thought i could do this." but we've actually done it. [ male announcer ] visit ameriprise.com and put a confident retirement more within reach.

and now our postscript. president obama was in central europe this week signing a new arms control treaty with the russians. and we remember the tragic disintegration of a european country 70 years ago, starting half a century of oppression for poland. first under the nazis and then under the soviet communists. it is the katyn forest massacre of 1940 when soviet secret police killed more than 20,000 polish and other prisoners. after germany and russia invaded poland and divided it